Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 74: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the arrangements which are expected to be put in place in the case of a person (details supplied); the rights, constitutional or otherwise accruing to them since they were born here, now or in the future; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23278/06]

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

At the outset, I would like to point out that this child's mother is not being deported from the State. Instead, her case falls to be dealt with under the terms of the Dublin II Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No. 343/2003. In accordance with the terms of that Regulation, the child's mother is due to be transferred to the United Kingdom, where she had previously lodged an asylum application.

This transfer has its origins in the fact that the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner (ORAC) made a determination that the mother's asylum claim should be considered in that State. Article 4 (3) of this Regulation states "For the purposes of this Regulation, the situation of a minor who is accompanying the asylum seeker and meets the definition of a family member set out in Art 2, point (i) shall be indissociable from that of his parent or guardian and shall be a matter for the Member State responsible for examining the application for asylum of that parent or guardian, even if the minor is not individually an asylum seeker. The same treatment shall be applied to children born after the asylum seeker arrives in the territory of the Member States, without the need to initiate a new procedure for taking charge of them".

I understand that while the child in question lodged a separate asylum application in this State, on 6 June 2006, this application has now been discontinued and his claim has instead been associated with his mother's claim. In addition, I understand that the Refugee Applications Commissioner is notifying the United Kingdom regarding the birth of this child and it is intended that the child will accompany his mother when final arrangements are made for her transfer to the United Kingdom.

I would like to explain the workings of the Dublin II Regulation in general and as regards how it applies in this case. The Dublin II Regulation is intended to prevent the phenomenon of 'asylum shopping' across Europe and sets out criteria for determining which Member State is responsible for examining an asylum application where applications have been lodged in more than one State. At the same time it guarantees applicants that one State will process their application, thereby preventing the creation of 'refugees in orbit', a situation which had pertained in Europe prior to the introduction in 1995 of its predecessor, namely the Dublin Convention. Under the Dublin Convention, and now the Dublin II Regulation, the Refugee Applications Commissioner can, on the basis of the relevant criteria, request another State to accept responsibility for an asylum application and have it processed in that other State.

In this specific case, the mother of the person concerned lodged an asylum claim in the State on 27 January 2006. Following investigation, it was determined by the Refugee Applications Commissioner that, pursuant to the provisions of the Dublin II Regulation, the United Kingdom is the appropriate State to examine the asylum application as the person concerned had previously lodged an asylum claim in that State, on 2 September, 2003, albeit under a different name and date of birth. The person concerned was offered an opportunity to appeal the determination of the Refugee Applications Commissioner to the Refugee Appeals Tribunal, but she chose to not do so. The person concerned was kept informed of developments throughout the course of her asylum application in this State and was made aware as soon as it was possible to do so that her case came under the terms of the Dublin II Regulation. The United Kingdom accepted responsibility for her case with the consequence that a Transfer Order was signed in respect of her on 30 May 2006. This Order was issued to her on the same day, requiring her to present herself to the Garda National Immigration Bureau (GNIB), 13-14 Burgh Quay, Dublin 2, on 6 June 2006 in order to make arrangements for her transfer to the United Kingdom. She presented as required on that occasion and has a further presentation date on 25 July 2006.

In accordance with the provisions of the Dublin II Regulation, the United Kingdom, and not Ireland, is responsible for examining the asylum claim of the mother and the child. Accordingly, it is intended that by 25 July 2006, final arrangements will have been made for the transfer of mother and child to the UK.

In relation to the position of the child in this State, the provisions of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act, 2004 would apply to his case. This means that as a child born in the State on or after 1 January 2005 to non-EU National parents, this child is not an Irish citizen given that he does not fulfil the criteria for Irish citizenship enshrined in that Act i.e. of having at least one parent lawfully resident in the State for at least three of the four years preceding the child's birth.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 75: To ask the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if, under the Dublin II regulations or otherwise, a person whose application for refugee status has been refused in another EU State and returned to their homeland, can again apply at any time, following a change of circumstance for refugee status in this or any other European jurisdiction; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [23279/06]

Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is not the usual practice to provide interpretations of EU or national law in the circumstances set out by the Deputy and without being aware of the full facts of a case.

In general terms, I can say that where a person has had an application for asylum rejected in a Member State of the EU and has been returned by that State to their country of origin, and subsequently re-applies for refugee status in that or another EU State, it would be the responsibility of the State in which the subsequent application is received to consider whether the application is admissible for consideration.

In the case of Ireland, section 17(7) of the Refugee Act, 1996 provides that a person to whom the Minister has refused to give a declaration of refugee status may not make a further application for a declaration under the 1996 Act without the consent of the Minister and strict criteria are applied before that applicant can be re-admitted to the asylum process.

It is, of course, the case that depending on the particular circumstances of an application, Council Regulation (EC) No. 343/2003 may apply. This Regulation establishes the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the EU Member States by a third country national.